And now Facebook shareholders have filed a lawsuit against the social network, CEO Mark Zuckerberg and a number of banks, alleging that crucial information was concealed ahead of Facebook's IPO. The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court in Manhattan on Wednesday morning, charges the defendants with failing to disclose in the critical days leading up to Friday's initial public offering "a severe and pronounced reduction."

Facebook ¬†defended themselves on Wednesday saying they "believe the lawsuit is without merit and will defend ourselves vigorously."

The report, and now the lawsuit, raises questions about whether Morgan Stanley, one of the underwriter companies that handled Facebook's IPO, or other banks knowingly offered certain investors privileged information that should have been made public.¬†Other underwriters targeted by the lawsuit include Barclays Capital, Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan Chase and Merrill Lynch, a unit of Bank of America.

It is possible that Morgan Stanley may have signed off on a price that was too high or agreed to sell too many shares in the deal, CNNMoney.com reports. Then, Morgan Stanley analysts are alleged to have told certain people they had a negative assessment of the social network's offering.

"If true, the allegations are a matter of regulatory concern to FINRA and the [Securities and Exchange Commission]," Ketchum said in a statement via a spokeswoman.

The New York Times reported¬†Morgan Stanley did more than just quietly share a negative outlook; they actually "held conference calls to update their banks' analysts on business."

"Analysts at¬†Morgan Stanley¬†and other firms soon started advising clients to dial back their expectations," the article says. "One prospective buyer was told that second-quarter revenue could be 5 percent lower than the bank‚Äôs earlier estimates."

Sallie Krawcheck, Bank of America's former head of wealth management, took to Twitter to share her outrage about the allegations.

The trader said he didn't receive a report of how many shares he bought and how much he paid for them until three hours after his order was executed. Typically, that report is transmitted instantaneously, he said.

‚ÄúThey are holding my money hostage,‚ÄĚ said¬†Sam Lesser,¬†who had put in a¬†$10,000 Facebook order from money he made in a small business he created. "It‚Äôs really disappointing, because we could have made money on this."

To prevent a repeat of Facebook's botched opening, Nasdaq has changed its process to no longer accept order modifications once the final calculation has begun.

Stock disappointing many - unless you're a flipper

If you bought Facebook hoping it would be a steady earner in the early days, you were certainly out of luck.

While the Facebook IPO was¬†one of the most highly anticipated IPOs in recent memory, setting a record for first-day trading volume, it's also been quite a¬†disappointment¬†so far.

The stock is still down about 15 and has yet to post a truly positive trading session. On Friday the stock had a minute gain, but other than that, it hasn't done much to impress early investors.

"It's a day trader's paradise right now," Douglas DePietro, managing director for sales trading and trading execution at Evercore Partners, told CNNMoney.com. "There's high volatility and high volume."

One does have much to do with other. Who really cares? The 'founders' of Facebook are now billionaires and nothing is going to change it. Billion here, billion there. Small change for them.

I am on Facebook but, so far, I did not find it useful at all. I have been sending private emails for more than a decade and I can even call people by phone. Facebook, of course, brings a lot of advertising, the real purpose of its existence.

Smart Zucke, good luck to him and many children with his wonderful wife. He has arrived.

"investment banks may have tipped off some clients that Facebook wasn't necessarily a great buy" – uh, this was common sense to anyone with a brain. Oh, and past results are not an indicator of future performance. Don't play in the market if you can't deal with losing money sometimes. It's not a guarantee people. You can't blame the banks for your own stupidity.

The stock market is like Vegas – don't gamble more than you can afford to lose. That being said, Morgan Stanley should lose millions and millions and millions of dollars if they did warn some investors and not others. And if Facebook gave false information, they should be smacked, HARD. I'm neither a Zuckerberg hater nor lover – I wouldn't want his life, with or without money. But if he didn't do anything wrong, then I hope he wins.

Trading delays and IPO manipulations are so standard with Wall Street that it's impossible not to get burned nowadays – forget about turning a profit. As it stands right now, based on the negative outlook and preferential shareholder disclosure rumors, I'm not willing to pay more than $5 a share.

Investment banks advise their clients. If you aren't a client, don't expect to get the benefit of their advice. Duh. It's not illegal to be stupid and it's not the obligation of those in the know to make you smarter. Really? You didn't know FB was mostly on a non-ad format (iPhones)? Really?

About This Blog

This blog ‚Äď This Just In ‚Äď will no longer be updated. Looking for the freshest news from CNN? Go to our ever-popular CNN.com homepage on your desktop or your mobile device, and join the party at @cnnbrk, the world's most-followed account for news.